BPA Arguement Rises Again With The FDA
A scientific panel is again blasting the FDA over their public announcements that BPA poses no immediate danger to infants or the general population. The panel and other panels say that the FDA has not considered all the findings by certain other studies and has dismissed them without good reason.
The FDA has yet to issue their final report on the matter and even worse they are under no pressure or deadline to do so.
The line that caught me right away is “poses no immediate danger”. That means very little to a parents using plastic bottles that have the chemical in it. A lot of things like learning diabilities and behavior problems won’t or might not show up for another few years. By then the damage has been done and the parent is left to deal with a child with problems. The meer fact that the safety of the product is in question is enough for me to say no way to baby products packaged in plastic containing BPA.
It would be nice to trust that the FDA has the best interest of the infants at heart, instead of wondering what their motivation is for the hesitation in speaking out against it.
BPA and Diabetes Links
BPA or Bisphenol A has been found in the bodies of every 9 out of 10 Americans. The FDA claims that the amounts found do not pose a health risk to anyone, no matter what age.
BPA is a chemical that disrupts hormones and has been used extensively to harden plastic for food and beverage packaging. However it’s also been found in drinking water tooth fillings and even dust in the home. It’s so wide spread that it’s virtually impossible to avoid it.
A survey showed that about 1,500 people who had a high exposure to BPA had a 40% higher rate of liver damage, diabetes, and heart disease.
Experts say that more studies are needed to prove that the BPA is a health hazard. The FDA said that further research should be done.
Even though a link was found between BPA and diabetes and liver damage, there is a question as to whether it is just coinsidence because those diseases don’t come on overnight.
This writer thinks that the FDA should not have been so eager to call the chemical safe if there was any doubt that it was, and to me the studies mentioned cast enough doubt to where the FDA should have investigated further.